Labor tries to smear Bishop without answering the real questions

Piers Akerman

–,
Monday,
November,
19,
2012,(3:04am)

DISTRACTION ALERT! DISTRACTION ALERT!

Prime Minister Julia Gillard is heading off – again – for another photo opportunity with US President Barack Obama.

Forget for the moment that Obama has his own mushrooming problems with his administration’s account of its handling of the deadly attack on the US embassy in Benghazi, Libya, which saw four Americans including the local Ambassor, murdered by terrorists.

Concentrate on the very real credibility problem that has arisen for Gillard over her involvement with the former union boss Bruce Wilson, for whom she set up what she has described as a slush fund when she was a partner at Labor law firm Slater & Gordon.

Remember that at the time she set up the AWU Reform Association for Wilson, the AWU was a client of the law firm and that the so-called Reform Association actually had nothing to do with the AWU.

Get the picture?

Gillard has insisted she did nothing wrong but there are outstanding questions which she has never answered about the work she did for Wilson and what she knew about his fraudulent use of the funds that were paid into the slush fund.

Now the Labor Party is attempting to shift the focus onto the deputy Opposition leader Julie Bishop with claims that she “has some questions to answer” about her work as a lawyer.

Frontbencher Brendan O’Connor told the ABC’s Insider program yesterday Bishop should come clean about her own past as a lawyer, particularly when she acted for building products company CSR Ltd as it fought claims by former workers exposed to deadly asbestos fibres from its mine at Wittenoom, in Western Australia.

“Clearly there have been some matters arising out of her role as a lawyer at CSR where she used, allegedly, procedural tactics to deny victims of asbestosis their day in court,” he said.

“Now she wants to go around spending her entire time not involving herself in foreign affairs, as she is supposed to as shadow minister, but instead seek to smear the government and the Prime Minister with unsubstantiated allegations, and I think there are some questions that she should be answering as well.”

Bishop, who acted for CSR in the 1980s under her then married name Julie Gillon, told The Australian she was simply doing her job as a lawyer for CSR and denied any wrongdoing.

Last week she pledged to continue to press Gillard in parliament over the AWU issue, saying she still has questions to answer.
The Prime Minister has repeatedly and emphatically denied wrongdoing in relation to a union “slush fund” she helped set up for her former boyfriend and union official Bruce Wilson when she was a salaried partner at law firm Slater & Gordon. The fund was later used to defraud hundreds of thousands of dollars from the AWU. Gillard says she had no knowledge of the operations of the fund.

There is no evidence that she received union money, or that anyone other than Gillard paid for the renovations to her Abbotsford home in Melbourne’s inner-east in the mid-1990s.

Gillard last week failed to respond to detailed questions about $5000 allegedly paid into her bank account on the instruction of Wilson in mid 1995. She accused The Australian of a smear campaign and of “being unable to substantiate any allegations of wrongdoing”.

There are a number of problems with the smear campaign the Labor campaign is trying to mount against Bishop.

The first is that she there are transcripts of the cases she worked on and therefore a record.

The files relating to all of Gillard’s work on the slush fund have gone missing.

Second is that there were never any allegations that Bishop may have had a conflict or have acted improperly.

That is not the case with Gillard.

Further, Bishop is open to questions and Gillard is not.

Make up your own mind, but better still, why does not the Prime Minister just answer the questions that are being asked by all major news organisations except the ABC?

Launching another smear campaign is not going to make this issue disappear.

Bazza, with Juliar’s penchant for married males, Michelle should be quite concerned. I would be because Juliar is a man eater.

NevilleW replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (05:39am)

There are 51% or more of the Oz people who would like to kick Gillard around the oval office right now.

valma replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (06:55am)

Mrs Obama better hide Mr Obama.

kate replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (07:30am)

What else have they got but smear ?

Australia cannot afford their extravagant promises,
or their dismantling of everything that once made Australia great.

Now the missing files scream corruption.

Photo op ?
can’t wait to see pics with bars in front of certain faces.

Liz replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (07:43am)

Oooops! I hope that Michelle Obama is around to keep an eye on her husband what with the track record of Gillard no man is safe!

The Village Idiot (Reformed) replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (08:20am)

I don’t think Gizzard likes blacks. Look how she treated Warren Mundine when the Senate vacancy came up for NSW. The former President of the ALP didn’t get a look in because he was black. Big Ears, a failed NSW premier, gets it. Is Gizzard racist ???

David of Emerald replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (08:48am)

Photo OP?

Another view of Big Ass Gillard waddling around the world stage looking like a lost child and embarrassing our Nation.

DS May replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (11:34am)

I wonder if Michelle will tell Julia to have another stomach ache like the last time
At least with Howard when he cosied up to Bush it was for a BBQ,steak and beer .

Edward James replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (11:39am)

Run away Prime Minister. It makes no real difference we know what you are! Edward James

Labor is foolish, stupid and ridiculous if it thinks it can smear Julie Bishop and get away with it. Ms Bishop’s actions as a lawyer contrast sharply with the devious, dubious and dumb actions of Julia Gillard.

According to The Australian, Julie Bishop was advised by two of the nation’s most senior barristers on the asbestos cases she has been accused by the government of attempting to delay through legal manoeuvres.

Ms Bishop has revealed that “procedural advice for one asbestos case she worked on was provided by Robert French QC, now the Chief Justice of the High Court. On two other asbestos test cases, advice was provided by David Malcolm QC, who is a former chief justice of the West Australian Supreme Court.”

And how about the following from Julie Bishop as a compare and contrast with Julia Gillard?

“At no time did I act other than in accordance with their (her clients) instructions and on advice from some of the most senior barristers in Western Australia.”

I put my money on Julie Bishop to box the living daylight out of Julia Gillard.

I see Michelle Grattan has jumped on the Julie Bishop bandwagon. No surprise there, just keep following instructions on what to write by Labor spinners as the ability to ask questions, analyse and seek legitimate answers has long since disappeared.

PaulC replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (06:07am)

Too right Laura. There is no comparison. Labor is foolish trying to divert attention with the CSR case. Bishop’s exemplary, documented, answerable, accountable and professional performance will show Gillard up. A failed person who never grew up.

Gillard assists the attack. She makes herself look more guilty every day.

I look forward to seeing her behind bars, a metaphor for Labor.

Labor is going down. Gillard is going down. Emily’s list is going down. The Greens are going down. The independents are going down. This stinks of corruption and cover up.

proud aussie replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (06:43am)

Laura, it is Julia Gillard and her co- accusers who are looking stupid over this latest smear attempt on Julie Bishop. They are making suggestions over Julie Bishop being a top class lawyer and doing the right thing by her then clients.

Did Julie Bishop set up a slush fund so someone could defraud the AWU? Then try to cover up her involvement in doing so?

Have files gone missing that would incriminate Julie Bishop?

Someone has egg all over their face and Julia Gillard is not going to get away with this. If the missing files don’t turn up, Julie Bishop is going to insist on a police investigation. Apparently where these missing files are kept, it is not easy to access by just anyone.
So that in itself leaves many questions that must be answered, in particular, WHO removed the files, under whose instructions.

Nicola Roxon is the Attorney General is she not? Hasn’t she come out in support of Julia Gillard, stating there is no substantiated evidence to incriminate Julia Gillard? One wonders.

The latest Nielsen Poll shows 53% to 47%, but the media is reporting the results as Tony Abbott slipping 1%. Oh please, we are not all that stupid, or gullible when it comes to manipulated reporting.

Ozzie Voter replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (06:45am)

If this government was as adept at governing as they are at manipulating debate on political issues, we really would be the envy of the world.
Now we hear that ABC journalists flatly refuse to touch the Gillard scandal, claiming she has answered all the questions. The stonewalling by the ABC of this issue is becoming very suspect in my opinion. While other media outlets, like the Australian and Fairfax papers have started to comment, the ABC steadfastly refuses, and is now trying to turn the spotlight on the squeaky clean Julie Bishop.
IMO the ABC is just another arm of this government and if all of this scandal finally results in some arrests and convictions - which I sincerely hope happens - they should all be required to answer for their blatant political bias.

Sarah replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (06:58am)

You miss the point. Right ot wrong has no relevence to these issuers. Labor continually explore the depths of stupidity of the average Australian voter to achieve their objective. What else would you expect from a party who’s central philosophical ideology ‘the end justifies the means’ has no moral or ethical foundation what so ever. The polls prove the point.

fay of perth replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (07:21am)

Yet-- Laura ,according to the polls todayJulia Gillard is the preferred Prime Minister. 46% to Gillard --31% Tony but prefer the Coalition as government.
Can anyone get their heads around that oxymoron?
What other nasty side of Ms Gillard’s character will the electorate sanction before they all run to protect her to keep her prime minister-ship intact?
The philosophy of these Gillard luvvies must be the gutter type
that prefers to grovel in the mud instead of looking to the stars in their search for their unrealistic ideals?
Perhaps the Coalition should allow Tony to stand back a while and allow some surrogates of the shadow cabinet to take jJulia on and thus keep him above the fray as the Americans do ?
Tony will make a marvelous PM but he hasn’t got that killer instinct that is needed at times -as did Robert Menzies- no one could get the better of him either in a debate or with a confrontation with the public In this way Gillard may reach breaking point and spill the beans
Tony is too much of a gentleman to verbally attack any member of the opposite sex let alone a female PM

Old Granny replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (07:36am)

It is a given that practising barristers do not always appear in Court on the side of the angels whatever their personal view may be - however in Court they are under scrutiny and bound by the confines of the Law. The best Labor can hope for in raising this issue is consolidation of the moron vote.

PaulC replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (07:42am)

Sarah,

Yes Labor has a thick hide but the affair has taken a decisive turn. Labor now cannot avoid the muck.

RoseB replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (07:54am)

Agree with you all, but have a comment Fay,: Robert Menzies never had to deal with a woman PM and an extremely dishonourable woman at that.
It was time when manners mattered, courtesy and respect for ones opponent a thing of the past it sadly appears, thanks to the socialist low life that have clawed their way into power,

proud aussie replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (08:23am)

Andrew Bolt demonstrates the huge difference between Julia Gillard’s involvement in the AWU fraud case and Julie Bishop’s capable handling of the asbestosis case on behalf of her clients.

It would seem the Gillard/Rudd mob think the majority of Australians are very dumb and ill informed. We are NOT! What an insult to our intelligence, what contempt they continue to dish out upon ALL Australians.

The Village Idiot (Reformed) replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (08:52am)

Will the federal parliamentary ALP move for the impeachment of the Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia for his advice provided to a solicitor in accordance with the requirements that she acts in the best interests of her clients, unlike Gizzard’s clear breach of duty in NOT acting in the interest’s of the AWU, but in ensuring ongoing sexual pleasure to her loins by a corrupt union official ???

P.J. replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (09:08am)

Fay, when it comes to polls that declare GILLARD as preferred PM, I know that she has all 1600 advisers answering that poll! Plus all the Public servants worried about losing jobs and the members of her own party along with any woman with an IQ of less than 80. Journalists working for Fairfax, like GRATTAN, probably threaten the staff too! Of course she is preferred by any criminal in the UNIONS too! It’s not that they PREFER GILLARD, they are bloody scared of what TONY will do when he gets in!

scotty replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (09:47am)

Laura, well said. Julie Bishop is a far more competent lawyer than Gillard ever was. Bishop has integrity and style which is not part of Gillard’s make-up. Gillard was guilty of blatant dishonest behavior as a lawyer in the AWU members’ slush fund corruption scandal.

~scotty~

fay of perth replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (10:16am)

Hi Rose B.
Bob would, I am sure have got stuck into Gillard without her knowing it He used polite satire and sarcasm on his Lady Hecklers in such a way they thought that they weren’t being ridiculed.I;m sure he would have broken the rules of etiquette over Gillard - as merciless “Ming “could not abide Communism-
remember the Petrov Affair. and how the referendum went in favor of the Communist party in Australia ?
We will never see the likes of Curtin -Menzies -and Howard again.
I’m driving my friends mad as they say i am obsessed over politics I said it’s better than hiding your head like an ostrich
Hi PJ
IMO conservative voters are in the minority. as logic and commonsense has been indoctrinated out of anyone who went through the state education system from the 70’s onwards They have been brainwashed so much so that they cant see through Gillard’s dysfunctional persona
Thanks for all that info too about how she boosts her poll numbers.
Even so add to that figure huge numbers of an under-educated electorate who are putty in the hands of a nanny government who is going to control every part of their lives- short of taking them to the toilet. --Australia is is in deep trouble
I have never thought this way before about the Australian voter -but i believe they are a new breed.
I don’t know these people The election IMO is going to be very close, Because i don’t trust the electorate to come up trumps over vital issues anymore and we conservative voters seem to be in the minority even though most states have conservative governments I hope i am wrong.....

Rose and PJ -keep rocking along regardless- as miracles do happen sometimes.

Laura replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (10:20am)

Before Keating lost office he was also preferred PM over John Howard!!!!! I rest my case!!!!

Julia Gillard can dream on but it will take more than her snotty slime and sicko spew to win the next election. When she’s finally tossed out I hope she lands heavily on Laurie Croaks and friends! They need to be permanently flattened!

Pericles replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (01:11pm)

Julie Bishop was doing the job expected of her as a lawyer
her employers and client.

The same cannot be said of Julia Gillards time as a partner
at Slater and Gordon.

Why did Gillard never practise law again and was out
of a job for 6 months before being taken up by John Kirner
as her CEO ?

If all was hunky dory at S and G surely Gillard could have
easily obtained immediate employment in the legal profession .... apparently not.....which I find rather curious
even suss.

A fourth file, this one from the NSW court, has gone missing. These people are relying solely on the MSM and the ‘elite’ Canberra Press Gallery to hide these revelations from to the wider public. They need the wider public to be kept ignorant of the facts. If the Media wish to maintain their freedom they will do what they are supposed to do, what they are paid to do, and take these facts to the wider public. News Ltd need to use their State based newspapers to get the facts out and Fairfax need to suggest to their senior political journalists that their role, and why they are paid, is to inform the public of the facts.

“To lose one set of documents is unfortunate, to lose 4 sets sounds down right corrupt”.

PaulC replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (06:16am)

Yes the cover up is now on, Slushgate. Julie Bushop get the police in. Nail the lot of them - Gillard, Emily’s listers, McTernan, the unions and more. This is too big to ignore. The top journo’s will be after this. This is the story of the century. Gillard is now alleged two major crimes - attempted destruction of evidence and fraud.

Jim replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (06:44am)

What an extraordinary reach this woman has.

It is clear that the files disappearance is not random, but organised.

It smacks of an inside job.

Public servants in all those departments need to be interrogated for what they know.

This attempted cover up is bigger than Watergate (a bungled burglary to obtain files against your opposition) as it involves theft of nearly half a million dollars of union money.

How can the PM claim she did nothing wrong, when clearly backdating an affidavit without witnessing the proposer’s signature, and not keeping a file at the law firm, and not notifying a payment of $5000 into her personal account would seem to be prima facie indicators of wrongdoing?

Seaforth replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (06:45am)

The crucial CONVEYANCING file has gone missing.

That is the file that would prove if Julia was involved in the checking of the source of the funds and the credit worthiness of that source. Julia would know how damning that file is, Julia would know if her very own signature appears on documents.

So who would issue the orders to destroy that file?

Whistleblowers are beaten up, Quasi-Judicial body is stacked, files go missing, grubby deals are done........is this Chicargo that we are talking about?

victoria replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (07:28am)

The points Piers has raised should be enough. Bishop did her job BY THE RULES OF LAW. She carried out her client brief WITHOUT WHITE ANTING THE CLIENT. There is no suggestion of GRAFT AND CORRUPTION. This should point out to everyone the differences between Gillard and Bishop....but the likes of Grattan either cannot or will not show unbiased journalism. Like the unrelenting attacks on Tony Abbott, this band of desperados led by the Scotsman will continue to do whatever it takes to take the heat off Gillard. Meanwhile, the boats continue to arrive, the country goes further into debt and the lunatics contine to run the asylum.

P.J. replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (09:18am)

BAZZA, Juliar is missing too...over with Obama, asking him for protection! God , please make her stay there, although I would be sorry for the American people! Ten days until 29th November! Don’t return JULIAR, as we have more questions for you, and Obama won’t HIDE THOSE DOCUMENTS FOR YOU!

Frank replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (09:43am)

Yes this is definately quacking like a duck!
It seems that maybe there are more people in the Labor Party with certified training in the use of paper shredders. It’s not just the vegemite kid who is a card carrier. You can easily identify the untrained, non certified members who can be seen running across the carpark with files in hand, looking for a shredder.

The AWB Investigator replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (09:44am)

Bazza,

I had thought of raising this subject as a separate comment intended primarily for Piers Akerman. I had hoped Piers would publish it due to my need for assistance in an investigation I have been undertaking over the past several days.

It is obvious that Australian Universities turn out journalists who are incapable of investigating anything which does not appear in print for them to copy so somebody has to do the thinking for them.

At my advanced stage in life, I realise that, sooner or later, I will be confined to a wheel chair. This assumes my maker does not decide to call me first.

After due consideration by the best specialist I could find, I have decided to undergo surgery which, if successful, will mean my use of a wheel chair, when I will need to rely on my loved ones for care, will be delayed for as long as possible. Failure or avoidance of the surgery will certainly mean the reliance on a wheel chair will be sooner rather than later.

Some of my working life was spent in Brisbane. Private health cover was regarded there by many as the choice to spend some time in a private hospital for some TLC. However, if you were actually sick, the recommended action was to get to the “General” ASAP.

The “General” was the name of the main public hospital, funded by the entire proceeds of the State Lottery, known as “The Golden Casket”. It was also before consultants were engaged to think up new names to confuse the public and “The General” became known as “The Royal Brisbane Hospital”.

Whilst I have found from experience that treatment in public hospitals is generally better than that available under the private hospital system, I have always paid for top private health cover. On occasions, the public hospital where I have received treatment has asked my permission for them to claim the benefits due to me from my private health fund.

The waiting period for the operation I need is about 3 years in the public hospital system in Australia. I understand from an English friend that a similar waiting time applies under the UK nationalised system, a period I can ill afford at my time of life.

My specialist makes no secret of the fact that he charges the fees recommended by the AMA for consultation in his own rooms. This is considerably more than that contained in the Medicare legislation but is probably the more realistic fee.

My private health cover only covers the “Gap” between the Medicare rate of cover and that actually charged when the services are rendered in a hospital, not in the consulting rooms.

The good news on this occasion, if there is any good news in regard to a pending operation, was conveyed to me by the specialist. He assured me that my private health cover, the highest available, would result in no payment being required from me for his or the surgeons efforts. He was uncertain as to how the fees of the other health professionals involved would be handled.

Judging by the time of night the surgeon phoned me to tell me when he could perform the operation, the receptionist in his rooms would have been long gone and probably in bed fast asleep.

However, on the very next business day, the receptionist was on the phone to me. I suspect she was concerned I might not be able to afford to pay for the “Gap”.

This second “Gap” was described as “the surgeons gap”. It is not the Gap advertised by the various Private Health Funds but another “Gap” receptionists know all about but surgeons appear not to be aware of it.

Collectively, I look like being out of pocket to the tune of nearly two thousand dollars. The obvious answer is to cease membership, at least temporarily, of my Private Health Fund and use the savings in premiums to pay the Gap I thought was already covered.

The information I now seek from fellow contributors of this Blog is where do the “surgeons gap” funds end up? Is it with the surgeon or the mob who seem to run the practices the surgeons and their receptionists work for?

The word KICKBACKS springs to mind but that is one word Australian journalists tend to avoid these days.

It needs some whistle blower to reveal the type of written agreement which exists between health professionals and the people who actually run the practices where the health professionals work from. I don’t think the actual receptionists are capable orchestrating such an operation without direction from elsewhere.

Gonk replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (09:50am)

I think I read somewhere that only the Attorney General can look into suspected misdeeds by a PM. Would that explain why an excuse was found by Gillard to shaft Maclelland, and Roxon put in his place? What has been Roxon’s role in all this? Where are the missing files? Who facilitated their disappearance? It’s both horrifying and tantalising at the same time isn’t it?

Caz replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (03:41pm)

AWB, I’ve been in top cover for years but can no longer afford to use it. One of my sons has had to have a couple of operations this year and has had to go public, through emergency.

Once upon a time, top cover meant you weren’t out of pocket. Now, unless you have a few thousand set aside, you have to go public anyway.

I hope you get your op quickly. Let us know when you’re going in xx

johanna replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (04:00pm)

4 files missing… has a smell of Rocksoff?

Sammi replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (04:05pm)

NSW has a 7 year jail term for tampering with evidentiary court documents. Someone should put them back now because Julia is not worth a 7 year jail term.

The AWB Investigator replied to Bazza
Mon 19 Nov 12 (07:54pm)

Hi Caz,

Thank you for your concern. I have been promised the op will be this year so what I appear to be paying for is access to the much shorter waiting list conducted by the surgeon’s receptionist.

If ever the medical industry in Australia is nationalised, as in the UK, the practitioners will probably get the blame. However, I suspect the real culprits are the non medical people who live on the outskirts of the profession and actually determine the eventual costs.

I don’t have any hard evidence but it could be that some of our doctors have been offered a service which, on face value, was too good to refuse.

What if some enterprising individual was to call at a doctors place of practice and offer, at a price too good to be true, a service where the doctor would no longer have to do the tiresome work of actually collecting his fees and chasing up bad debts? I can just imagine the sales pitch.

I remember when the AWB issue was being misconstrued by the media, the pitch was that “everybody knew Kickbacks were the only way to do business in that part of the world”.

I have good reason to believe that “Kickbacks” have been the norm right here in Australia for a very long time. This is why I would like to know exactly how the Kickbacks demanded by his receptionist for the opportunity to be placed on the surgeon’s waiting list gets distributed. Neither the surgeon nor the referring specialist seemed to be aware that further charges were going to be demanded.

P.J. replied to Bazza
Tue 20 Nov 12 (08:25am)

AWB, hope all goes well for you with the operation. Before you cancel private funds check it out with MEDICARE, as the funds and specialists don’t always give you the correct information! Several years ago, after my husbands operation I was driven crazy with constant mail from doctors I knew nothing about, for tests etc etc plus gaps galore, I had a concertina file just for a/cs of that one operation! Recently it seems as though the a/c s go straight to Medicare as we have had no billing or gaps. We have TOP medibank cover and the dental bills go straight to Medicare/Medibank also. . My husband has to go to the Public hospital, where he is treated as public patients are, but has the choice of specialists! Is the receptionist correct about the gap she requests? Perhaps she is not up to date with any new rules! Best of luck sorting this out!

All Labor is interested in is deflection and smear and ruining this Country. Julia completed forms to register the AWU in WA then completed a letter to bonifide the pretence, was actively involved in the purchase of the house in Vic with Union funds and claims when the shut hit the fan I was young and innocent 30 something partner in a law firm I did nothing wrong wont answer specific questions. Nothing to see he - move along - more spin - more distraction lets close down the fishing industry and start a witch hunt on the Catholic Church and smear Julie Bishop to boot !!!

Tim, can you make my hair stop looking like a wookie? Sorry Michele, Im not a very good hairdresser,

Talking about photo opportunities .... I’m waiting for the shots of Barack Hussein Obama and Julia Eileen Gillard being led away in hand cuffs.

The citizens are not forgetting that Mr President of the United States fiddled while Benghazi burned and Miss Prime Minister of Australia diddled, twiddled and piddled as AWU money went missing. To hell with both of them!

diddled, twiddled and piddled is exactly my sentiments in regard to Gillard. I think that Obama and Gillard deserve each other.

The latest attempt to involve Julie Bishop in a smear campaigne is disgusting, and shows how low this government will sink to retain office and their objective to ruin Australia.

When watching programmes such as “The Insiders” I cannot believe that there are supporters for Gillard and her mob of misfits. Truly amazing.

Thank goodness for journalists such as Piers who keep up the fight and give us all hope for the future.

Warren replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (07:39am)

Laura, unfortunately, this scum has the media in their pocket. It is a formidable opponent. Mr. & Mrs. Half-Wit of Australia knows very little of this and believe everything the TV tells them.
A fourth set of documents “stolen”.....we have no law in this country, they are laughing at us.
Keating finally has his wish, we’re now officially a “Banana Republic”.

proud aussie replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (08:13am)

AND a huge number of Americans are not forgetting electoral rorting and maniuplations they believe occurred during the recent elections.
WHO is going to investigate?

Crockcitys voice of dissent replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (09:13am)

Hi Laura - I’m guessing that, given the good citizens of the USA recently re-elected Obama in a pretty emphatic manner, maybe you’ll be waiting a long long time to see Obama in handcuffs.

P.J. replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (09:20am)

Warren, they don’t have ALL the media in their pockets, thank God. All Fairfax!

Laura replied to Laura
Mon 19 Nov 12 (10:34am)

Crockcitys voice of dissent, ...... nothing emphatic about Obama’s so called win. He’s the only US President to win a second term with less support than he achieved in his first term. The electoral college system means winner (no matter the margin) takes all! And remember Nixon? I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss those hand cuffs! Anyway I would be happy with metaphorical ones and a diminshed reputation. Re that diminished reputation, Obama and his teleprompter are already on the nose. They both stink like 6 day old dead fish! A bit like Gillard. Why do you think our PM keeps losing her shoes? They can’t stand being near her!

Who watches this crap on INSIDERS? I have given up long ago. Barrie Cassidy, his “panel” of “experts” and his occassional guests are an insult to our intelligence. However, it seems they all know their audience (the voting public) very well, because they keep on talking crap and Gillard’s and the ALP’s poll numbers keep on going up. The voting public, its clear, will believe ANYTHING. They WILL get the government they deserve.

DZ you may be interested to know that the odds of a Conservation victory in election 2013 are $1.35.

That is as short as you can get for an event some 12 months in the future. Unlike the media Bookmakes are not ideologically driven. They are in fact driven by money and their obsession with not losing any.

RoseB replied to DZ
Mon 19 Nov 12 (07:46am)

Just who are the voting public that watch ‘The Insiders’?
I gave up long ago as did most of my intelligent friends and family, Those on social security are not watching, the late teens are not watching, too busy sleeping in, the very elderly are not interested so it appears to be only Labor luvvies,& those watching to observe the continued bias.
They have zero relevance and are not worth our tax payer dollars, Barry would serve us al better if he had a good sleep in on Sundays, last time I looked in, he appeared to need it.

The Village Idiot (Reformed) replied to DZ
Mon 19 Nov 12 (09:08am)

@ Seaforth - You are spot on mate. I put $10 on Romney to win @ $4.15 the week before the election with Sportingbet. The night before I saw their odds had blown out to $4.50. I thought they were mad and placed a further $20 on Romney. Bookies always win !!!!

David of Emerald replied to DZ
Mon 19 Nov 12 (10:58am)

Be interesting to know whether Insiders audience goes up when a non-left commentator is on the panel.

When Piers appears and we know in advance does the audience double?

Just asking if anyone knows the figures or where I can get them.

Bagrat replied to DZ
Mon 19 Nov 12 (11:59am)

I tried to watch Insiders on Sunday in order to help develop a ‘balanced’ view of the issues. As soon as I saw David Marr I had a rapid bowel movement and was forced to switch channels.

Big Ears lover replied to DZ
Mon 19 Nov 12 (12:20pm)

When you think about it DZ, the TV remote has become like a pace maker controller (not that I have one ). Those who are drawn to the ABC should take their blood pressure before Insiders, and then after the show, and then do the same with Bolt on channel 10. They’ll find the next week, if they still have an impulse to watch the ‘Barry loves Julia show’ and they do switch it on, then they need to just apply a little pressure to the top red button on the pace maker controller and the stressful programme will magically disappear. They’ll find that their heartbeat will begin to slow down and regulate during the hour it takes until Bolts show starts, after they’ve long forgotten the krinkly one and the puppets on his left. I’ve tried it, it really works! Doc will vouch for this device, as he is a professional.

The days of massive protection and cover-ups for union and Labor Party criminals is coming to an end

I say let the ‘games begin!!!’ on the floor of Parliament. All Julie needs to do is answer and address the allegations in Parliament and then call on Gillard to do the same with the allegations made against her.

That surely will make Gillard’s obfuscation and denial, and ‘already answered that’ stance untenable.

It’s going to backfire on Gillard in a big way by attacking and smearing Julie.

Ms Bishop said – “As one of the lawyers in the case, I acted ethically and professionally at all times in accordance with client instructions.”

Now, can Ms Gillard prove she did the same?

My father-in-law died in his mid 50s from mesothelioma. My ex and his tradesmen friends were all exposed to it. As kids smashing up fibro chook pens, we were exposed to it. Tens of thousands of people have been living with it at the back of their minds for years. I’m not inclined to defend anyone on this lightly when it comes to compensation for the victims.

However, Julie Bishop did not invent asbestos. It has nothing whatsoever to do with her. She acted ethically and competently and UnionLabor can’t touch her.

She is formidable and tenacious and the ALP are in a spot of bother.

Go Julie!!

scotty replied to Bile
Mon 19 Nov 12 (10:34am)

Bile of Malvern, well said. Let the games begin!!!! Began when Gillard TOOK office on bribes and deals she made with the Greens and Independents Oakeshott and Windsor. Wilkie lost out on the pokie reforms because the club lobby is far too powerful and could damage Labor at the next election.

DISTRACTION ALERT! DISTRACTION ALERT! What Piers said is correct.

Everything Labor and Gillard does is a distraction from the main issues of the carbon tax, the economy, the boat people and Labors bald-faced lying to the Australian people.

Caz, well said! How many of us have been exposed to asbestos? Go Julie!!

~scotty~

Big Ears lover replied to Bile
Mon 19 Nov 12 (10:40am)

I love it when you have the megaphone out Piers!

The media is a powerful ally Bile, but I agree with you and Caz. Julie’s ethics (lets face it, all lawyers are unethical to a degree) as far as doing her job according to the boundaries of lawful practice goes, is in tact. I’m happy she isn’t a lawyer anymore, and she is only one of a handful of ethical pollies. This will see her through this smear campaigne I hope, because Juliar is looking more nervous than ever!

Caz, I left a message last page last blog… it’s a little O/T!

You really have to laugh at these attempts to smear Ms Bishop.

There you have a group of unionists having a go at someone for doing their job - they’ll be calling for a go slow next!!!

Another cringe inducing effort from the ALP. To think anyone would see this as anything but a baseless and childish attempt to deflect attention away from the problems of the under siege Gillard shows what little regard our “government” has for the average IQ of Australians.
If Gillard has nothing to fear from these questions, why does she continually duck them and why do her fellow carbon blobs engage in this pathetically childish attempt at impugning decent people.
Gillard has to step up and clear the air. All she has done so far is make herself look deceitful and untrustworthy. This disgraceful attempt to smear Julie Bishop deserves comtempt and little else.

The problem is that the wider public are not reading or seeing much about the attacks on Gillard/AWU. They are only seeing what the likes of Grattan and co are writing and on top of that News Ltd are basically running the story in the The Australian only and then promoting Samantha Maiden articles in the Telegraph which are also critical of Bishop.

PaulC replied to Mandrake
Mon 19 Nov 12 (07:56am)

Mandrake and Bazza,

It has gone beyond our usual complaints. There are now four files missing. Cover-up is an in-your-face issue. The police are going in.

The counter smear on Bishop is landing very flat. Her defendable professional approach will well withstand public scrutiny and by stark contrast show Gillard up even more. This brings her avoidance into very centre stage. She has two choices. Keep avoiding and have everyone assume guilt or answer the questions which may lead to conviction.

Labour must be very nervous now. Many a pretty stupid, like Swan. But those with heads like Frgsn know a public execution awaits.

P.J. replied to Mandrake
Mon 19 Nov 12 (09:26am)

PaulC, intelligent investigation will turn up copies if not the originals, and ALL THOSE FOOLS who are covering for Gillard will join her in jail! If I had my way they would all HANG!

PaulC replied to Mandrake
Mon 19 Nov 12 (09:57am)

PJ

I understand your sentiment. I support capital punishment but only for murder and only when most clear.

Labor’s tactics resemble those which might occur in a playground: “you copied my homework”; “well, you ate Tony’s lunch”! One does not cancel out the other however substantiated it is.

Mutually destructive secrets have been used since politics began to silence one politician by tipping them off that the other side knows something damaging about them. When the “secret” is known to be nonsense it can be canvassed publicly just in the vague hope that some mud will stick.

The term “unsubstantiated” can be used as long as any means of substantiating discoveries in a legal sense is avoided - that’s another useful tactic.

Asking questions in parliament about a matter in the public domain is not “smearing” - what’s next - closing down “Question” Time? Our trust in the democratic system which is actually supposed to protect us from corruption and wrongdoing is being slowly eroded away so why not?

Julie Bishop unlike Labor lightweights, is more than capable of handling this pathetic attempt at shifting the focus from Gillard. She only needs to play it straight and down the centre using her considerable focused skills to throw it right back at them. She does not need to defend herself, that only plays into their hands.

We need to see more of Bishop, Brandis, Cormann giving it to Labor with their unflappable slice and dice approach and really start putting more pressure on Labor from all quarters. It’s time for more Coalition members to widen their portfolio pressure points against Gillard and the weak members of the smear team. Attack on ALL fronts by ALL Opposition members relentlessly not just Tony Abbott.

Julie will be able to point out she never slept with any crook, unlike Jooliar !!!!

Do these file storage rooms whence the damning documents disappeared not have CCTV monitors? Particularly the evidence storage places? Would not a check of the recorded footage show just who went to that particular filing cabinet or box recently? How many can there have been?

And since the empty folder was left behind in at least one case, would they not bear the fingerprints of anyone who had handled them ?

Someone should move fast to collect the empty folder and the CCTV-DVDs before they too get disappeared.

Halcyon Days replied to The Old and Unimproved Dave
Mon 19 Nov 12 (07:05am)

Dave they don’t care if they are” recorded in the act’, they don’t care if they are damned for sticking by Thomson, they don’t care if a boat a day arrives on our shores or if a Captain Ahmed, owner of perfume shops, is granting refugee status as he ‘flees persecution’.

They will do whatever it takes to cling to power. And the resaon is quite clear, look at the sums involved in Labor embezzlements. High stakes indeed.

Dave, there are no CCTVs in the Federal Court Registries, at least not when I worked there. (Casual employment as a Court Officer) I did do a lot of extra work in the Registry and can tell you that record keeping there is near well immaculate. If material has gone missing, it will be because of human intervention. Real questions must be asked here!

Records (at least of current matters) are kept in a Compactus, a device which can be shut to preserve space and opened at what ever division is required. Anyone accessing files would be well in view of any other worker in the Registry. As for archived material-your guess is as good as mine.

GetOut replied to The Old and Unimproved Dave
Mon 19 Nov 12 (07:12am)

Dave, I once worked in the Attorney-General’s department and the places where these files are stored would not be accessible to just anyone. There would be reception and inquiry areas to approach, you would have to know where files and archives are kept to find them plus the filing or computer system used. There is no way anyone could just walk in and take them or copy them. Probably no CCTV but it’s just not easy. A police inquiry is required when so many files are going missing. Smacks of inside help.

Zebedee replied to The Old and Unimproved Dave
Mon 19 Nov 12 (12:36pm)

It shouldn’t be too hard to find the culprit(s). I doubt more than one or two would be involved in the convenient disappearances. I understand some of the documents were present a year ago so if you compile a list of everyone who visited the respective archives in the past year then cross-reference the names across all four locations and anyone who has visited all four or even three places in the last 12 months will be the likely suspect(s).

It seems, as each day passes, that the stench of corruption grows wider. What started as an accusation of misappropriation of Union monies by a smalltime crook - Craig Thomson - has spread its tentacles to include Government Ministers, past and present, in the ALP, public officials, and ,maybe big names in law enforcement and the judiciary.
Whoever took the files must be someone in a very senior position, and intent on safeguarding information that would possibly incriminate him/her and other vested interests.
Very curious too, are the Media journalists who appear to be going all out to assist in the cover-up. It surely can’t be left-wing ideology, pure and simple, that is behind the cordon they are throwing up around Gillard and her cronies. Blind Freddie could see that Gillard has a case to answer. The strength of the evidence is behond dispute, yet they continue to side-step the issue, aiding and abetting the culprits, almost as if they are prepared to go down with the ship.
The whole smelly business makes the Richard Nixon Watergate affair look like very small cheese. But will our law-enforcement agencies have the bottle to pursue it without fear or favour? Time will tell.

Did you see Gillard’s face yesterday on TV when she was asked that curly question? Fake rage is for personal attacks on Tony Abbott, hide and watch she is close to the real thing.

What a red herring by Labor dirty tricks department. It’s really irrelevant who from the Liberal party is asking the questions that must be asked. Whether it’s Julie Bishop or Bronwyn Bishop the only requirement is that a woman do the questioning to avoid the misogyny tag that Labor throws around.

“Though most common in men, misogyny also exists in and is practiced by women against other women or even themselves.

From Wikipedia

Michael G. Flood is an Australian pro-feminist sociologist at the University of Wollongong.

When I was taught the meaning of misogyny in the 1960s by our English teacher, it was the case that men or women could be misogynist - as both are capable of hating women.
I do not know why the meaning has changed to mean only men can be misogynist - unless Macquarie dictionary has changed the meaning.
Other dictionaries do not specify the gender of a misogynist - maybe that can be clarified by someone with a better understanding of language than I.

I believe that the attack on TA would be easy to refute -as a misogynist - by definition - hates women for their gender - and so to hate one for their gender is to hate all - and clearly there is no evidence to show that TA hates his wife, his daughters, his chief of staff, and his deputy. Therefore TA CANNOT be a misogynist.

wow, did Julia Bishop set up a slush fund, and register it as a CSR Work Reform fund for her them boyfriend, while totally unknown to the CSR company, where multiple hundreds of thousands of “protection” monies were paid into ?
did Julie Bishop, not open a file when, doing all the foreign jobs for her then boyfriend, within CSR, for whom she had opened the Slush fund?
Is Julie Bishop honouring her promise “there will be NO carbon tax under the government she leads”?
was Julie Bishop still Young and naieve in her 30’s, and while operating as a partner in the CSR company?
yes these questions need to be answered.

We are currently applying for newstart and I can assure you that no matter how much money she throws my way, she will not get my vote. I blame the ALP for mismanaging the country which has led to job losses. I

PaulC replied to jack
Mon 19 Nov 12 (07:18am)

Won’t be long now and Gillard will be admiring a Greek Doric iron decorated window and door. Stripped of parliamentary super. Having ever so much more opportunity to empathize with pensioners and the down trodden. Unlike pensioners though she will not have worry about security. The big house is well secured.

Won’t Labor be a laughing stock. It’s pm behind bars. Just think of the repercussions. This will break Labor. The unions are gone.

David of Emerald replied to jack
Mon 19 Nov 12 (09:10am)

Paul’’I love your line

Stripped of parliamentary super. Having ever so much more opportunity to empathize with pensioners and the down trodden

That should apply to all those who have kept this mob in power including public servants.

Well, they got away with the Heiner affair,so when you are onto a good thing....! Something must cause everything to unravel

Profile

Piers Akerman

Piers has been one of The Daily Telegraph and Sunday Telegraph's best-read columnists since 1993. One of the nation's most respected journalists he has worked in New York, London, Washington and Los Angeles. He lives in Sydney with his wife and two daughters and enjoys a wide range of activities.